Sun Country chooses PDX for it's second base

[ChasenSFO]

I think what Midwest had working heavily against them was they chose their base as MKE. No matter how many analysis reports you run to justify MKE being able to support a national LLC, it just wont work. Skybus is another example of that. Thanks Obama!

They had a big MCI hub in the 2000s too, and an OMA focus city. But I guess those all fall under your same umbrella haha.

 

[Ecl!pse]

That is all true but this was a change to the extreme, and Sun Country is far less known than Frontier, Allegiant, and Spirit. Really, I think Sun Country's biggest mistake(other than throwing the finger to their loyal flyers for the last 40 years who chose them over freggin Delta often) was refusing to allow seamless MSP connections until a few years ago. I know their MSP hub model was geared mostly at getting people out of MSP and then back home, but SFO-MSP could have been marketed as SFO-SXM/LGA/RSW/SJO ect. But instead, one would have to buy 2 tickets, re-check the bags, re-clear TSA(assuming there were bags to check/claim), and have no protection in the event of a misconnect. Firing all station managers, outsourcing almost everything to the lowest bidder, and going from great comfort/service at a cheap price to almost no comfort/service for a slightly cheaper price. And they chose to get into the West Coast blood bath where Southwest, United, and Alaska are all dumping frequencies and slashing fares on routes out of PDX, LAS, SFO, ect that Sun Country has decided to start serving. All the other airlines have to do is price match Sun Country and there is no reason for the average West Coast pax to choose them over the majors. You're entitled to your opinion, mine is unfortunately that we won't have Sun Country 10 years from now, be it by merger, take over, or bankruptcy. Hopefully I'm mistaken, but seeing as Sun Country got rid of just about everything "Sun Country", from First Class to the employees themselves, and that on many routes like SFO-MSP Delta has already price matched with much more to offer, I don't see a happy ending here. And I love happy endings.

Sun Country as we know them today is far less known than Frontier, Allegiant, and Spirit, but the same was said about Allegiant/Spirit when they went through their ULCC conversions. I would be shocked if anybody outside of the aviation circles really knew who/what they were before becoming ULCC's. Frontier was a little better known by the time they were acquired, so not exactly comparable.

I'm not sure that using MSP as a connecting point for them would necessarily be a viable strategy. It's not really a convenient stopover in your SFO-SXM/RSW/SJO scenario (maybe an OK option for LGA), so you would probably have to price those seats pretty cheap in order to make it more appealing than a stop in DEN/DFW/IAH/MIA/ATL/etc. I'd be hard-pressed to think that those connections would generate more value for you than simply selling seats in the local market, but who knows.

I definitely agree with you that the most probable outcome in 10-years is probably some kind of Sun Country tie up, but I think the probability of a Sun Country bankruptcy in the next 10-years was almost inevitable under the old business model. The second fuel prices rose, the economy shuttered, or worse yet - both, there was simply no way they were going to make it. This model at least gives them a fighting chance today, and better prepares them for some kind of downturn in the future.

 

[ChasenSFO]

@Ecl!pse were Allegiant and Spirit ever not ULCCs? They basically pioneered the concept, though I think both started with charter work mostly(DTW/ACY based for Spirit and a single FAT-BUR-TVL-FAT flight for Allegiant then charters as planes came on) but I don't think either was ever a full fare airline so I don't think there was any radical change that happened quickly at either company.

Tell Delta that MSP isn't a good connecting hub LOL! It's like 60% RJs there for Delta, mostly connecting traffic. I'd bet a lot of money on the fact that people don't really pay attention to the flight times unless they are extreme or critical to the trip. People in the Bay Area know Aeromexico sometimes has SFO to Tokyo by way of a 3-4 hour layover in MEX for $400ish, so they do that. SFO-MEX-NRT is no little detour when there are so many non-stops or 1-stops via SEA/LAX/HNL. But most people only care about price, that is how Spirit can squeeze people in so tight and still have them line up to go to South America.

I agree with your position, but those 2 points just stood out a bit.

 

[Ecl!pse]

@Ecl!pse were Allegiant and Spirit ever not ULCCs? They basically pioneered the concept, though I think both started with charter work mostly(DTW/ACY based for Spirit and a single FAT-BUR-TVL-FAT flight for Allegiant then charters as planes came on) but I don't think either was ever a full fare airline so I don't think there was any radical change that happened quickly at either company.

Tell Delta that MSP isn't a good connecting hub LOL! It's like 60% RJs there for Delta, mostly connecting traffic. I'd bet a lot of money on the fact that people don't really pay attention to the flight times unless they are extreme or critical to the trip. People in the Bay Area know Aeromexico sometimes has SFO to Tokyo by way of a 3-4 hour layover in MEX for $400ish, so they do that. SFO-MEX-NRT is no little detour when there are so many non-stops or 1-stops via SEA/LAX/HNL. But most people only care about price, that is how Spirit can squeeze people in so tight and still have them line up to go to South America.

I agree with your position, but those 2 points just stood out a bit.

You are correct, both Allegiant and Spirit were originally charter carriers before transforming into scheduled ULCC’s. I would call the change from charter to scheduled 121 a radical change in itself, in addition to introducing the US to the ULCC model with little-to-no brand recognition. All this is to say, it’s not fair to compare the “new” SY to those carriers today, since SY is just now branching out but G4 & NK have been doing this for over a decade.

On the connections - notice I said connecting wouldn’t be a viable strategy for them (SY), not that MSP itself wasn’t a viable connection option. Of course, DL already has the US network to feed a hub that is largely east-west connections. I’m sure we can pull the data, but I would guess that DL isn’t really connecting that many folks West Coast - MSP - LatAm. I think SY would have to discount heavily to entice customers to make that connection. And if SY wanted to compete with DL on any connectivity, much less east-west connectivity, good luck. DL would have assuredly match/cut them on fares, while retaining a holistically better product - cabin, loyalty, network, schedule, etc.